On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 20:46, Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:44:42AM -0800, James Jones wrote:
hammers[i++] = loop_dev;
nr_garts = i;
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
if (i == MAX_HAMMER_GARTS) {
printk(KERN_INFO PFX Too many northbridges for
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:17:17AM -0800, James Jones wrote:
diff -ruN linux-2.6.0-test7/arch/x86_64/kernel/pci-gart.c
linux-2.6.0-test7-fixed/arch/x86_64/kernel/pci-gart.c
--- linux-2.6.0-test7/arch/x86_64/kernel/pci-gart.c 2003-10-08 12:24:04.0
-0700
+++
Dave,
Similar patch to Ronny's, but also changes a config check on x86_64
arch. It struck me that this patch is still slightly wrong. It should
check the number of bridges already found before going through the
entire detection routine again shouldn't it?
-James
Dave Jones wrote:
On Fri,
hammers[i++] = loop_dev;
nr_garts = i;
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
if (i == MAX_HAMMER_GARTS) {
printk(KERN_INFO PFX Too many northbridges for AGP\n);
return -1;
}
Seems wrong to me... wouldn't this return -1 if say, MAX_HAMMER_GARTS ==
1 and 1 gart was
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:44:42AM -0800, James Jones wrote:
hammers[i++] = loop_dev;
nr_garts = i;
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
if (i == MAX_HAMMER_GARTS) {
printk(KERN_INFO PFX Too many northbridges for AGP\n);
return -1;
}
Seems
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 08:56:32PM +0100, Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
If we have an SMP system with an SMP kernel, we add however many
GARTs to the table, up to a limit of MAX_HAMMER_GARTS.
It looks like you'll add GARTS up to MAX_HAMMER_GARTS-1 then bomb if
there is an
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 12:13:37PM -0800, James Jones wrote:
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote
It looks like you'll add GARTS up to MAX_HAMMER_GARTS-1 then bomb if
there is an MAX_HAMMER_GARTS'th GART.
Yes, thanks for putting it more clearly Ronny.
Dave, try walking through the
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote
It looks like you'll add GARTS up to MAX_HAMMER_GARTS-1 then bomb if
there is an MAX_HAMMER_GARTS'th GART.
Yes, thanks for putting it more clearly Ronny.
Dave, try walking through the code with MAX_HAMMER_GARTS=2 and SMP
enabled. You should quickly see what we
The ( i MAX_HAMMER_GARTS) fix was just an example. The test really
needs to be == and be moved before the
hammers[i++] = loop_dev;
assignment, or hammers will be overflowed, as I mentioned in my previous
email.
Also, it really seems like this test should be done before you go
through all
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 11:46:54AM -0800, James Jones wrote:
test8 had broken detection for this agp chipset. You have to edit a
file in the x86_64 arch directory to get it to allow more than 0
(assuming you configed for uniprocessor) bridges to be used, as it
checks a variable after
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 18:55, Dave Jones wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 11:46:54AM -0800, James Jones wrote:
test8 had broken detection for this agp chipset. You have to edit a
file in the x86_64 arch directory to get it to allow more than 0
(assuming you configed for uniprocessor)
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 03:28, Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 11:43, Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer timed out, resetting engine...
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP reset -1020
(EE) RADEON(0):
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 12:11, Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 03:28, Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 11:43, Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer timed out, resetting engine...
(EE)
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 11:43, Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer timed out, resetting engine...
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP reset -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP start -1020
This particular problem
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 01:54, Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 00:43, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
Something in the last week or two broke the r200 driver. After I cvs
update'ed and recompiled yesterday, I get this error:
(EE) RADEON(0):
test8 had broken detection for this agp chipset. You have to edit a
file in the x86_64 arch directory to get it to allow more than 0
(assuming you configed for uniprocessor) bridges to be used, as it
checks a variable after incrementing rather than before. I also found
the check wasn't even
Something in the last week or two broke the r200 driver. After I cvs
update'ed and recompiled yesterday, I get this error:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer timed out, resetting engine...
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP reset -1020
(EE)
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
Something in the last week or two broke the r200 driver. After I cvs
update'ed and recompiled yesterday, I get this error:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer timed out, resetting engine...
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 12:03, Keith Whitwell wrote:
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
Something in the last week or two broke the r200 driver. After I cvs
update'ed and recompiled yesterday, I get this error:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer timed
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
Something in the last week or two broke the r200 driver. After I cvs
update'ed and recompiled yesterday, I get this error:
[...]
Card is 9000/128mb under linux 2.6.0-test9 (athlon64 running in pure
32bit mode) with an lcd connected to dvi.
just wanted to let you know that
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 20:43, Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
Card is 9000/128mb under linux 2.6.0-test9 (athlon64 running in pure
32bit mode) with an lcd connected to dvi.
Just checked latest DRI CVS with my radeon 9000 PCI, no errors. I know
it doesn't help but it might give you a better idea of
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
Something in the last week or two broke the r200 driver. After I cvs
update'ed and recompiled yesterday, I get this error:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer timed out, resetting engine...
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 00:43, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
Something in the last week or two broke the r200 driver. After I cvs
update'ed and recompiled yesterday, I get this error:
(EE) RADEON(0): RADEONCPGetBuffer: CP GetBuffer -1020
(EE) RADEON(0): GetBuffer
23 matches
Mail list logo
